‘A Dark Insect Swarming’: Wyndham Lewis and Nature Paul EDWARDS I would like to thanks the organisers very much for their kind invitation to address this symposium. I have been asked to speak about the British modernist painter Wyndham Lewis（1882–1957）. I’m not sure how well known Lewis’s work is in Japan, but I do know that it is not really very well- known in England, even though he is generally recognized as an important member of the Avant- garde during the period of around 1910 to 1919. He is especially well known as a pioneer of geometrical abstraction in England [Fig.1: Portrait of an Englishwoman] related to Cubism, Expressionism and Futurism, which was given the name ‘Vorticism’ by his friend and associate, the American poet Ezra Pound. As can be seen from this drawing, Portrait of an Englishwoman, there is a relationship between this form of abstraction and the forms of Russian Constructivism and Suprematism. Lewis edited the magazine of the Vorticists, Blast [Fig.2: Blast cover] in 1914, and copies – in which Portrait of an Englishwoman was reproduced – reached Russia that year, which perhaps explains these formal similarities. It is this phase of Lewis’s work that is best known in England and the U.S., but other, later phases of his work are scarcely known. 1. Wyndham Lewis, Portrait of an Englishwoman, 2. Blast cover 1914 Pencil, ink and watercolour, 56 x 38 cm, Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford. The Ella Sumner and Mary Catlin Sumner Collection －25－ 立命館言語文化研究26巻 3 号 3. Comparing between Praxitella and Yoritomo Wyndham Lewis, Praxitella, 1921, oil on canvas, Leeds City Art Gallery; Portrait of Minamoto no Yoritomo, Kamakura period, 13th century, colour painting on silk, 143.0 × 112.8cm, Jingoji-temple, Kyoto Like Pound, Lewis was profoundly influenced by Eastern art, initially through the work of H. A. Giles and Laurence Binyon, the keeper of Chinese art at the British Museum. Lewis not only read Binyon’s book, The Flight of the Dragon, but knew him personally. He always considered that the West took a wrong direction in visual art when the Greeks followed the path of scientific, vitalist naturalism. The affinities of Lewis’s own work with Eastern art are easy to see in such pictures as Praxitella [Fig.3: Praxitella and Yoritomo], where there are clear similarities to the well-known portrait of Minamoto no Yoritomo by Takanobu（though there are obvious and clear differences, too: this is not just a Western attempt at Japanese painting）. Another example, a drawing produced in 1921 of a sitter named Bella Medlar, [Fig.4: Bella Medlar] shows an ambition to emulate some of the linear effects of an artist like Utamaro（or so it seems to me）. Lewis was also doubtful about the traditional hierarchy of medium and genre in European art, preferring to work on paper with pencil, ink and wash rather than in oil on canvas. [Fig.5, Mr Tut]. Within traditional hierarchies, a drawing like this, of his wife’s pet dog, is a minor work, but it is a clear homage to Chinese art of the Sung period, which Lewis considered one of the pinnacles of artistic achievement. Of course, it implies an attitude to nature, but not the attitude that is usually dominant in his work. Before proceeding to an exposition of that dominant attitude, its variations and contradictions, I should point out that even if Wyndham Lewis had never painted a picture, he would still be a figure of immense cultural importance as a writer and intellectual. This is so much the case, indeed, that there is a flourishing critical literature on his writing that virtually ignores his painting except as something that needs to be acknowledged as the source of an aesthetic bias in his thought. It is －26－ ‘A Dark Insect Swarming’（EDWARDS） 4. Wyndham Lewis, Bella Medlar, 1921, 5. Wyndham Lewis, Mr Tut, 1931, pencil, pencil on paper, 41.5 x 23.5 cm, private charcoal and wash on paper, 28 x 24 cm, Collection, London private collection possible to do this because Lewis kept the practice of his two arts quite separate, rather than, like William Blake, marrying the two. So Lewis is an important modernist writer of fiction, an important writer about philosophy and culture, and a controversial writer about politics and political theory – notoriously for his qualified endorsement of Hitler in 1931, which he only abandoned towards the end of 1937. Lewis’s paintings speak for themselves and were not provided with textual supplements, but our understanding of them can certainly be helped by a knowledge of the views he expressed and philosophical problems he addressed in his writing. And he was the author of over 40 books, besides editing three magazines and producing a great many essays. The first thing that needs to be said about these views and their mode of expression is that in everything, Lewis was always pulled in two directions: the antinomies of thought were real to him, and if he makes forceful choices of a position regarding ‘nature’ or reason versus intuition（and there are few writers more forceful than Lewis at his most polemical）, he never does so without being aware of the pull exerted by the opposing position. As he says, maybe a little too optimistically, in one of his most important books（Time and Western Man, 1927）, ‘This natural matching of opposites within saves a person so constituted from dogmatism and conceit. If I may say so, it places him at the centre of the balance.’ １） It seems doubtful that Lewis believed that anything but partial truths could ever be reached by philosophical argument – or indeed that anything but partial truths were available to us at all. As I have suggested also, he did not seek to resolve antinomies（for example by a version of Hegelian dialectic and synthesis）. Thus one truth did not necessarily eliminate its contradiction or opposite, and we shall find this in his attitudes to －27－ 立命館言語文化研究26巻 3 号 nature. This did not, as I have said, stop him arguing forcefully for whatever ‘truth’ he felt needed recognition at any particular moment. He believed that philosophy began in wonder, and it is doubtful whether he thought that the purpose of philosophy was to dissipate wonder, but rather to prolong it. He proposed in an essay in 1922 that some of the functions of philosophy（which he then saw as undergoing fundamental change）would be taken on by the visual arts, and no doubt the function of perpetuating and deepening this sense of wonder was one of the functions he had in mind. ２） It should always be remembered, then, that for Lewis visual images had a direct philosophical component, and were partly meditations on the relationship between being and becoming. Lewis spent his intellectually formative years in Paris（roughly 1904 to 1908）, absorbing the anti-positivist and anti-rational thought of such thinkers as Henri Bergson and Friedrich Nietzsche. His case for abstraction in art was thus partly that our common sense perception of the world did not actually correspond with its truth or ‘essence’: ‘The essence of an object is beyond and often in contradiction to, its simple truth: and literal rendering in the fundamental matter of arrangement and logic will never hit the emotion intended by unintelligent imitation.’ ３） But the artist still needs to deal with this world（Lewis is critical of Kandinsky’s abandonment of the real world for what he takes to be a world of spirit）, ４） and the artist’s job is therefore not so much to copy nature as to become it, and create in its manner: ‘The finest artists – and this is what Art means– are those men who are so trained and sensitized that they have a perpetually renewed power of DOING WHAT NATURE DOES, only doing it with all the beauty of accident, without the certain futility that accident implies.’ ５） The commitment is not so much to nature as to something that lies behind nature, and it is possible to read Lewis’s theory of abstraction as one that takes its cue from Henri Bergson（whom Lewis studied while in Paris but later rejected）. To abstract is to suggest the operation of the force underlying nature: but paradoxically those forces are only visible through the particulars of nature: the surface. So Lewis writes in Blast 1 that ‘the finest art is not pure abstraction, nor is it unorganized life’, and in Blast 2, Fine and god-like lines are not for us but, rather, a powerful but remote suggestion of finality, or a momentary organization of a dark insect swarming, like the passing of a cloud’s shadow or the path of a wind. The moment the Plastic is impoverished for the Idea, we get out of contact these intuitive waves of power, that only play on the rich surfaces where life is crowded and abundant. We must constantly strive to ENRICH abstraction till it almost plain life, or rather to get deeply enough immersed in material life to experience the shaping power among its vibrations. ６） This talk of waves, clouds and winds that play on the surface brings to mind the great －28－ ‘A Dark Insect Swarming’（EDWARDS） Romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley’s ‘Ode to the West Wind’, in which the transcendent power behind nature is figured as the wind, whose presence is itself only visible through the surface effects on waves, clouds, and so on. To those with some knowledge of Japanese art it may bring to mind the clouds and waves of screens by Sotatsu and Korin, and it is possible that Lewis had Korin’s screen in mind when he wrote this passage.